**You know, I read Gv's comment on latinum and I think I just realized how pointless it is to go into play-by-play detail considering it's just a ''summary'' - most people have seen the episode, and those who haven't probably aren't looking for a novel. Anyway, I originally kept referring to the camera/3947 as "it" or "the object," but it sounded really awkward, so dunno if there's a way to fix this. --[[MemoryAlpha:User:Schrei|Schrei]] 00:40, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

**You know, I read Gv's comment on latinum and I think I just realized how pointless it is to go into play-by-play detail considering it's just a ''summary'' - most people have seen the episode, and those who haven't probably aren't looking for a novel. Anyway, I originally kept referring to the camera/3947 as "it" or "the object," but it sounded really awkward, so dunno if there's a way to fix this. --[[MemoryAlpha:User:Schrei|Schrei]] 00:40, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

−

===[[In a Mirror, Darkly, Part II]]===

+

−

'''Self nomination'''. A page that I hope is accepted as a ''Defiant'' class article! Thanks to [[User:Shran|Shran]] for helping, particularly with the start of the summary. --[[User:Defiant|Defiant]] | [[User talk:Defiant|''Talk'']] 23:19, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)

−

*'''Support'''. You both did a great job with this one. It'll go nicely with the summary for Part I.--[[User:Scimitar|Scimitar]] 00:49, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:28, September 5, 2005

Contents

Nominations without objections

A long and detailed list of all the uses of Latinum. I don't know how long this article has been on MA, but I was extremely impressed by it! --Defiant | Talk 14:48, 2 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Neutral. It's a very good article, and very well researched. I doubt, though, if it's really an example of "the best of Memory Alpha's community work". I don't know, but for some reason this article doesn't really fit with my idea of what an FA should be. As I have no valid reason to oppose, though, I do not. Ottens 22:25, 2 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Comment, I would just like to add, that the fact that it is so thoroughly researched makes it a prime example, because that shows a lot of effort went into this, versus simply watching an episode and just sequentially writing what happened in it...where there is, in effect, no research taking place. With this article, however, there is a great deal of organization, cross referencing and so forth, which indicates a great deal of effort was made in compiling and constructing this article. --Alan del Beccio 22:38, 2 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Comment This is a very good article, but in some places there are no links, even on text where the link would be obvious. Tobyk777 01:45, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

A few more Comments On the article's talk page, it says that the part about USD conversion rates was deleted. I think that this should be put back in. It's what gives people who read the article a way to see how much latnum is really worth. Also, about the issue on the talk page as to whether gold is valuable to Ferangi, i would say yes. In "Little Green Men" Quark agrees to take gold in compensaion for technology. But there are other items sources given which contrict this. This should be added to the contridctary info page on Ten foward. Tobyk777 22:56, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Comment, there's a part that says "Values to be evaluated", doesn't that mean it's not in fact complete? - AJHalliwell 23:12, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Can a quote of the rules be a reason to support? Tobyk777 02:14, 5 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Neutral I can't support this article until the part in the talk page that was deleted is put back. Without the comparison to US dollars there is no way for readers to acuratly visulize how much latnium is worth. Tobyk777 02:14, 5 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I don't recall it ever being given a value to US dollars. --Alan del Beccio 05:35, 5 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Regardless of wheather it was given a precise value, the speculation in that section seems acurate, and really clears things up. Tobyk777 16:35, 5 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I believe the usage of the words "speculation" and "seems acurate" in the same reference is a contradiction, sir. US dollars should not be mentioned whatsoever unless US dollars were so mentioned. That entire section was validly moved because it was clearly stated as "speculation", and has no confirmed basis in the Trek universe. --Alan del Beccio 17:23, 5 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Self-nominationI think having my stuff run alongside Defiant's has given me an inferiority complex, because they keep getting longer and longer. Only beat me by 10kb this time! Anyway, I think this is one of the best I've done. --Schrei 01:11, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Comment, is the teaser really in the correct POV? It does refer to the viewer, and the screen, even if it is sorta POV of 3947. - AJHalliwell 23:47, 2 Sep 2005 (UTC)

You know, I read Gv's comment on latinum and I think I just realized how pointless it is to go into play-by-play detail considering it's just a summary - most people have seen the episode, and those who haven't probably aren't looking for a novel. Anyway, I originally kept referring to the camera/3947 as "it" or "the object," but it sounded really awkward, so dunno if there's a way to fix this. --Schrei 00:40, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Nominations with objections

Oppose. It's an extensive article but hardly perfect. I'd personally like to see a bit more on their culture. I don't think that the references are complete either.--Scimitar 00:57, 5 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Oppose Yes I am oppsoing this one contrary to popular belief that I support everything. There is no list of appearances. The article has no link to the rules of Aquisition that I can find. The refrences are incomplete. There is no list of Ferangi, or at least a link to another aticle with a list. Tobyk777 02:11, 5 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I think this should be removed, based on the fact it was nomiated by a blocked user. --Alan del Beccio 05:35, 5 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

This version of the article has been subsequently revised. Besides normal editing, the reason(s) for revision may have been that this version contains factual inaccuracies, vandalism, or material not compatible with the Creative Commons License.This work may be protected by copyright. Please see 17 USC 108 for more information.